This just in, email from ama
07-20-2016, 09:26 AM
#26
07-20-2016, 10:33 AM
#29
07-20-2016, 10:41 AM
#30
Banned
My Feedback: (8)
What I do know is that there are those that have done nothing but whine and complain and gnash their teeth and second guess and always come up with suggestions about how things SHOULD be done, or SHOULD have been done. They are just like the folks at your club (assuming you're part of one) that have all these great suggestions at meetings about how the next event should be run, or how to fix something, or you know just about anything. And when they are told, great idea, put that together and then come back to us and let us know you're plan.....poof...they crawl back under their rock, never to be heard from again. Or until the next meeting, when the cycle repeats itself.
So, go back 10 years worth of AMA threads and tell me, what's one trend running throughout. You've been there, so you should know. The constant drone of the know it alls, the prognosticators and Carnacks, all gifted with the keen ability of 20/20 vision. Oh how they would change the world. Oh how they would do things. Oh how much better it would be. Ironically the discussion of "Traditional" versus "others" was alive way back then too, well before the drones arrived and filled the EC with bloodlust and visions of world domination.
Only one guy I can think of tried to take the bull by the horns and do something, and the campaign and lead up to the elections were nothing short of a dumpster fire. He was resoundingly voted down, and had the class to admit it, then move on. I wonder if the same will be said for the next AMA VP or Presidential candidate who doesn't make it to the top. Time will tell
So ya, boilerplate response or challenge, call it what you will. Is anyone going to do anything about it or spend the next ten years doing the same thing they have already done...whine from the sidelines? Based on history...I know what my bet is on.
Please wash the hands before leaving the public house.
07-20-2016, 11:50 AM
#34
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Aguanga,
CA
Posts: 1,779
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
See post 22
07-20-2016, 06:53 PM
#38
07-22-2016, 12:42 PM
#42
------- 10 Jul 2016 email from me to FAA UAS Integration Office ------
"Public law 112-95 section 336 paragraph (a)(1) through (a)(5) details five conditions that must be met for a sUAS / sUAS operation to be considered a "model aircraft" under the law. Paragraph (a)(2) discusses a community-based organization and uses the word "and" on two conditions within that sentence. In the FAA's "Interpretation of the Special Rule for Model Aircraft" the question of a membership requirement was left unanswered.
It is an important question as to whether the FAA will require citizens to be members in private dues collecting organizations in order to enjoy the privilege of operating a "model aircraft" in the public airspace. Requiring membership in the AMA to operate as a "model aircraft" as defined in PL112-95 Section 336(a)(2) would be the legal equivalent of requiring membership in AOPA to operate as a private pilot. Therefore, this is an important ambiguity to be resolved.
Therefore, Yes or no, does the FAA interpret PL112-95 Section 336 paragraph (a)(2), "the aircraft is operated in accordance with a community-based set of safety guidelines and within the programming of a nationwide community-based organization;" to mean that to be considered a "model aircraft" under the law, the operator must be a member of a community-based organization? [emphasis added]"
----- 12 July 2016 FAA UAS Integration Office response --------
"The FAA does not interpret PL 112-95 Section 336 (a) (2) as requiring membership in a CBO, nor does the FAA list any CBOs. You must only follow the guidelines of a CBO. [emphasis added]"
"Public law 112-95 section 336 paragraph (a)(1) through (a)(5) details five conditions that must be met for a sUAS / sUAS operation to be considered a "model aircraft" under the law. Paragraph (a)(2) discusses a community-based organization and uses the word "and" on two conditions within that sentence. In the FAA's "Interpretation of the Special Rule for Model Aircraft" the question of a membership requirement was left unanswered.
It is an important question as to whether the FAA will require citizens to be members in private dues collecting organizations in order to enjoy the privilege of operating a "model aircraft" in the public airspace. Requiring membership in the AMA to operate as a "model aircraft" as defined in PL112-95 Section 336(a)(2) would be the legal equivalent of requiring membership in AOPA to operate as a private pilot. Therefore, this is an important ambiguity to be resolved.
Therefore, Yes or no, does the FAA interpret PL112-95 Section 336 paragraph (a)(2), "the aircraft is operated in accordance with a community-based set of safety guidelines and within the programming of a nationwide community-based organization;" to mean that to be considered a "model aircraft" under the law, the operator must be a member of a community-based organization? [emphasis added]"
----- 12 July 2016 FAA UAS Integration Office response --------
"The FAA does not interpret PL 112-95 Section 336 (a) (2) as requiring membership in a CBO, nor does the FAA list any CBOs. You must only follow the guidelines of a CBO. [emphasis added]"
07-22-2016, 04:43 PM
#45
Banned
My Feedback: (8)
------- 10 Jul 2016 email from me to FAA UAS Integration Office ------
"Public law 112-95 section 336 paragraph (a)(1) through (a)(5) details five conditions that must be met for a sUAS / sUAS operation to be considered a "model aircraft" under the law. Paragraph (a)(2) discusses a community-based organization and uses the word "and" on two conditions within that sentence. In the FAA's "Interpretation of the Special Rule for Model Aircraft" the question of a membership requirement was left unanswered.
It is an important question as to whether the FAA will require citizens to be members in private dues collecting organizations in order to enjoy the privilege of operating a "model aircraft" in the public airspace. Requiring membership in the AMA to operate as a "model aircraft" as defined in PL112-95 Section 336(a)(2) would be the legal equivalent of requiring membership in AOPA to operate as a private pilot. Therefore, this is an important ambiguity to be resolved.
Therefore, Yes or no, does the FAA interpret PL112-95 Section 336 paragraph (a)(2), "the aircraft is operated in accordance with a community-based set of safety guidelines and within the programming of a nationwide community-based organization;" to mean that to be considered a "model aircraft" under the law, the operator must be a member of a community-based organization? [emphasis added]"
----- 12 July 2016 FAA UAS Integration Office response --------
"The FAA does not interpret PL 112-95 Section 336 (a) (2) as requiring membership in a CBO, nor does the FAA list any CBOs. You must only follow the guidelines of a CBO. [emphasis added]"
"Public law 112-95 section 336 paragraph (a)(1) through (a)(5) details five conditions that must be met for a sUAS / sUAS operation to be considered a "model aircraft" under the law. Paragraph (a)(2) discusses a community-based organization and uses the word "and" on two conditions within that sentence. In the FAA's "Interpretation of the Special Rule for Model Aircraft" the question of a membership requirement was left unanswered.
It is an important question as to whether the FAA will require citizens to be members in private dues collecting organizations in order to enjoy the privilege of operating a "model aircraft" in the public airspace. Requiring membership in the AMA to operate as a "model aircraft" as defined in PL112-95 Section 336(a)(2) would be the legal equivalent of requiring membership in AOPA to operate as a private pilot. Therefore, this is an important ambiguity to be resolved.
Therefore, Yes or no, does the FAA interpret PL112-95 Section 336 paragraph (a)(2), "the aircraft is operated in accordance with a community-based set of safety guidelines and within the programming of a nationwide community-based organization;" to mean that to be considered a "model aircraft" under the law, the operator must be a member of a community-based organization? [emphasis added]"
----- 12 July 2016 FAA UAS Integration Office response --------
"The FAA does not interpret PL 112-95 Section 336 (a) (2) as requiring membership in a CBO, nor does the FAA list any CBOs. You must only follow the guidelines of a CBO. [emphasis added]"
07-22-2016, 05:12 PM
#47
07-22-2016, 05:21 PM
#49
http://www.modelaircraft.org/aboutama/gov.aspx
Beginning at about 35 seconds, Chad makes the following explicit statement: "We've made it clear, that to operate within our safety program, you must join the AMA and affirm your willingness to comply with our safety code and related safety guidelines. [emphasis added]"
You accuse me of creating ambiguity? Is Chad not speaking for the AMA? In that capacity did he not say that "to comply with our safety program, you must join the AMA." No ambiguity there. Certainly none created by me. Chad made the statement in an AMA produced video.
Thankfully, the FAA UAS Integration Office does concur with AMA's position. In response to a direct question that even used the AMA as an example, they explicitly rebuked the AMA's statement by saying that "The FAA does not interpret PL 112-95 Section 336 (a) (2) as requiring membership in a CBO, nor does the FAA list any CBOs. You must only follow the guidelines of a CBO. [emphasis added]"
Beginning at about 35 seconds, Chad makes the following explicit statement: "We've made it clear, that to operate within our safety program, you must join the AMA and affirm your willingness to comply with our safety code and related safety guidelines. [emphasis added]"
You accuse me of creating ambiguity? Is Chad not speaking for the AMA? In that capacity did he not say that "to comply with our safety program, you must join the AMA." No ambiguity there. Certainly none created by me. Chad made the statement in an AMA produced video.
Thankfully, the FAA UAS Integration Office does concur with AMA's position. In response to a direct question that even used the AMA as an example, they explicitly rebuked the AMA's statement by saying that "The FAA does not interpret PL 112-95 Section 336 (a) (2) as requiring membership in a CBO, nor does the FAA list any CBOs. You must only follow the guidelines of a CBO. [emphasis added]"
07-22-2016, 05:25 PM
#50
As for savings / eye of the beholder / join for many reasons.... don't disagree. I just know that operating as a "model aircraft" under PL112-95 Section 336 (a)(2) isn't one of them. FAA says quite clearly that you do not need to be a member to operate lawfully under the law as a "model aircraft."